Japan Fukushima-Daiichi nuclear power plant blog
Tracking Fukushima news from day 1 : | Now one of the world's largest Public Available Repositories of the Chronology of the Daiichi Nuclear ongoing Disaster.
This entire site and content is 100% copyright (for commercial replication), please use the form to submit application for re-use. This site is 100% Educational and all licences in relation to reporting are attended to.

Friday, 31 January 2014

A new method to stop highly toxic radioactive strontium in ground water from flowing into the sea using American technology will start in February at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant.

Among the radioactive materials that were dispersed at the site, the potentially lethal alkaline earth metal poses the biggest immediate concern, because, unlike cesium, it doesn’t get trapped in soil and tends to accumulate in bones of fish and animals if ingested.

...

The technology to be introduced uses apatite: a mineral that’s similar to bone in its makeup and has the ability to capture and hold certain elements including strontium.

At the Hanford site in southwestern Washington state, where the U.S. government produced more than 20 million pieces of uranium metal fuel for nine nuclear reactors, apatite is used to block strontium from liquid nuclear waste in soil from flowing into the adjacent Columbia river, according to the U.S. government’s website.

“We’ll have to see if the technology works in a salt water environment,” said Tatsuya Shinkawa, director of the Japanese government’s Nuclear Accident Response Office. “It has captured 90% of the strontium in the ground water at the Hanford site. But that site is far from the sea, and this method hasn’t been used in an environment so close to the ocean.”

The government plans to conduct tests from February to May by putting a cylindrical case filled with pebbles covered with apatite into the ground water, and if necessary improve the technology to work with salt water. The case will be about 20 meters long and 1.5 meters in diameter. “If it goes well, we will probably make an apatite wall between the tanks and the sea,” Mr. Shinkawa said.

The use of apatite is one of 780 suggestions from around the world that Japan’s International Research Institute for Nuclear Decommissioning received last year in response to its call for solutions of the contaminated water problem.

Radiation levels in groundwater sampled from several monitoring wells have been very slowly rising since last summer and radioactive strontium has been detected since October, according to data from Tokyo Electric Power Co., which operates the Fukushima Daiichi plant. Leaks started in early 2013, and Tepco considers the time gap came because radioactive materials tend to move slowly in underground.

Tokyo — Tepco, the operator of Japan's crippled Fukushima nuclear plant, said Friday it booked a whopping $7.54 billion April-December profit owing to an electricity rate hike and its massive government bailout.

Tokyo Electric Power (Tepco) was teetering on the brink as cleanup and compensation costs stoked huge losses and threatened to collapse the sprawling utility until Tokyo stepped with a multi-billion dollar rescue.

The company at the centre of the worst nuclear accident in a generation said it earned 772.9 billion yen ($7.54 billion) in the nine months to December, compared with a net loss of 2.2 billion yen in the same period a year earlier.

Area of Texas 268,820 sq miles (696,241 km²) 696,241 km²The Area of the JTMD is 1.45 the
size of Texas 1.448613339 1.45 times greater than
Texas

reference:
To find the area of a rectangle, multiply the length by the
width. The formula is:
A = L x W, where A is the area, L is the length, W is the
width, and • means multiply

I also did the math as to distance/time. The following is
something I wrote and posted on several GLP threads...

This is very real folks.

NOAA admits that there are no satellite photos of the JTMD
(Japan Tsunami Marine Debris), so your statement is quite
correct.

Now the question comes...

Why are there no satellite photos of the JTMD?

Well, I did the math, and guess what?

The last commuter model depiction was on Dec 3, 2013 which
was 999 days after the tsunami.

The leading edge of the debris field is located at 6868
miles to the east of Fukushima between the 30th and 40th
parallels (it went south a little bit). That's 85% of the
way to the west coast of the U.S. and Mexico. It's been
travelling a little less than 7 nautical miles a day.

The total distance between Fukushima and the California
coast is about 8070 nautical miles.

Using the precise average per day momentum (6.874874875
nautical miles per day) with 1,174 miles to go, the expected
date of its arrival in northern California (where it will
hit first) is Monday, May 26, 2014.

The frontal assault of the debris field is 950 nautical
miles (as per the NOAA graphic). The width of the debris
field is 490 miles.

By simple estimation, when the frontal assault lands on U.S.
& Mexican soil, it will remain as a mass (at least
initially). This means that 1093 miles of shoreline will be
impacted by debris that will extend 564 miles out into the
pacific ocean.

NOAA claims in the article that the JTMD may break up, but
it hasn't broken up very much since March 11, 2011. But even
if it does, it only means the that width of the debris field
will be less, but the frontal assault will be greater.

So if, for instance, that the JTMD will break up by 50%,
fifty percent more shoreline will be impacted, and those
numbers are: A frontal assault of 1640 miles against the
shoreline with a debris field that is 245 wide.

Simply stated that people will be very surprised if my
analysis is accurate to almost any probable degree.....

Quoting: Anonymous
Coward 19767135

....Size as in size from a to b.
Distance (from east to west border)...

I.e. Not size as in area or mass. ;) Quoting: Anonymous
Coward 16824975

.... The Japan Tsunami Marine Debris (field) is within about 90% of an area
delineated by main latitude and longitude lines that appear on globes and
Google Earth (when lat/long lines are selected).

Here is an image of the Pacific Ocean with the JTMD and the dashed lines
indicating the area where possible impact could occur on land...

In the NOAA JTMD pdf, you will notice that lat/long lines appear as squares.
This means that they are all perfectly straight lines and they do not meet
at the poles. This type of map is called a "Mercator Projection." In the
image below taken from the NOAA pdf, you will notice the "squared" lat/long
lines. About 90% of the debris field fits within the lines of Latitude and
Longitude.

It is important to note that NOAA selected 475 and 950 (nautical) miles as
its correlating measuring tool. Most such measuring tools use a decimal like
system such as 10-20-30 or 50-100-150. NOAA chose these unusual numbers for
an obviously good reason. In the next image you will see that the leading
edge of the debris field is precisely 950 (nautical) miles from the nearest
land mass.

To accurately measure a large area on a map using lat/long, a more accurate
map projection has to be used. This type of map has to reflect that the
lines of longitude have to meet at the poles. This type of map is called a
"Conical Projection." It is used by Google Earth, airlines and scientists to
name a few.

In the next image, the NOAA “Mercator Projection” was resized to fit
perfectly into Google Earth’s “Conical Projection” for greater accuracy. Two
portions of the debris field extend outside the boundaries of the Lat/Longs
of the greatest part of the debris field.

In a seemingly crude fashion, the debris areas that extended outside the
Lat/Long main debris field were cut from the surrounding areas and were
pasted into the main debris field area that can now be easily measured. Here
is the image of the modified debris field…

Now because the line of latitude at the N30° parallel is greater than the
N40° parallel, two measurements had to be taken so that the average length
between them would result in an area that would form a rectangle.

The Length of Latitude at the N30° parallel was measured at 962.7 km
The Length of Latitude at the N40° parallel was measured at 851.3 km

The average width of these two lines of latitude is 907 km

Measuring the Length of the lines of longitude results between the N30° &
N40° = 1112 km

The formula for measuring the area of a rectangle is A=L*W (area = length
times width).
The result of 907km times 1112km = 1,008,584 km² (square kilometers).

SHELLFISH
from Cumbria, the Solway Firth and Morecambe Bay could be banned under new
international food safety regulations.

The
UK’s Food Standards Agency (FSA) has warned that lobsters, cockles and scallops
from the north west of England and the south west of Scotland are so
contaminated with plutonium discharges from Sellafield that they will breach
limits due to be introduced by the United Nations next year.

The
UN’s Codex Alimentarius – which brings together the World Health Organization
and the Food and Agriculture Organization – is proposing a safety limit for
plutonium in food of one becquerel per kilogram (1Bq/kg).

The
aim is to reduce the long-term risk of getting cancer from eating these foods to
below one in a million.

Tuesday, 28 January 2014

There's an analogy that removing these rods is like removing a cigarette from a crushed pack.

"Take that analogy," TEPCO engineer Masayuki Ono said in Japanese, "and imagine that the cigarette in that box is lit."

Ono said they have removed 15 percent of the fuel from Reactor 4. But it will be far more difficult to retrieve fuel from the other three reactors that melted down. Those are so radioactive that the technology to dismantle them does not exist yet.

TEPCO injects hundreds of tons of water daily into the reactors to keep them cool. But groundwater is pouring into the damaged reactors and has to be pumped out and stored.

Currently, the underlying etiology remains undetermined. We present results on gamma analysis (cesium 134 and 137) of muscle tissue from control and diseased seals, and discuss wildlife health implications from different possible routes of exposure to Fukushima fallout to ice seals. Since the Fukushima fallout period occurred during the annual sea ice cover period from Nome to Barrow, a sea ice based fallout scenario in addition to a marine food web based one is of particular relevance for the Fukushima accident. Under a proposed sea ice fallout deposition scenario, radionuclides would have been settled onto sea ice. Sea ice and snow would have acted as a temporary refuge for deposited radionuclides; thus radionuclides would have only become available for migration during the melting season and would not have entered the regional food web in any appreciable manner until breakup (pulsed release). The cumulative on-ice exposure for ice seals would have occurred through external, inhalation, and non-equilibrium dietary pathwaysduring the ice-based seasonal spring haulout period for molting/pupping/breeding activities. Additionally, ice seals would have been under dietary/metabolic constraints and experiencing hormonal changes associated with reproduction and molting.

AN INDEPENDENT CITIZEN RADIOACTIVITY MONITORING NETWORK IS FINALLY
BORN TO INFORM TRUTHFULLY AND CREDIBLY THE US REDISENTS OF DAILY RADS
ACROSS .THE NATION, AND TO GIVE POSSIBLE ALERTS IF NECESSARY.
CONNECT TO SHARE, LEARN AND INFORM.

My
Japanese daughter 30 years, was born and lives in the city of Iwaki,
Fukushima Prefecture, 60 km from the Fukushima Daiichi plant
Therefore I have been following tightly the events of Fukushima.I am the main administrator of Fukushima 311 Watchdogs with a FB page , FB group and 2 blogs.

It is true that the hoaxes and exaggerations of all kinds do not serve the cause of the victims in Fukushima.

However it is clear that your article has a minimalist effect that bothers me :1 . You cite no 3 CORIUMS out of control2 . You do not mention the volume of contaminated water released into the Pacific for almost 3 years3
. You support the "dilution" of the contamination in the Pacific to be
safe , though it is not oil , radionuclides are "dispersed" and do not
lose their lethal capacity in their dispersion , unlike in dilution.4 . You do no talk about all those people still living in highly contaminated areas that the government did not evacuate .5 . You do no mention that the Japanese government wants to bring back the majority of evacuees to live in areas of high radioactivity.

The overall effect of the content of your article , despite its good title is minimalist and disturbing.On the other hand your lack of public visibility vis-à -vis of Fukushima raises many questions.

BREAKING
NEWS: This is an email from the EPA to air quality districts that were
to monitor for radiation fallout back in 2011 from Fukushima. This was
obtained with a Freedom of Information Act request by University of
California Santa Cruz lecturer Dan Hirsch who has been a radiation
expert for over 40 year .The highlighted sentence says, "EPA HQ has
decided at this time to not deploy the deployable
RADNET monitors to CA, OR and WA." So at the height of the emergency
the central coast, the very spot where the radioactive plume was
supposed to hit, the EPA had no working monitors for the air quality in
Monterey, Santa Cruz, San Luis Obispo or Santa Barbara counties. Why?!

HERE'S THE THING: Typically when it comes to environmental disasters,
the EPA takes the lead role in reporting environmental disasters to the
public. But in the case of Fukushima, in March and April 2011, at the
height of the Fukushima emergency, the pronuclear Nuclear Regulatory
Commission and the pronuclear Department of Energy stepped in and told
the EPA we'll take things from here. Why was that?? That needs to be
investigated. Why was the typical role of the EPA usurped like that?

So we really have no clue how much radiation was in the air on the
central coast in the days and weeks after the Fukushima accident thanks
to the government's purposeful coverup. DID THE NUCLEAR LOVING NUCLEAR
REGULATORY COMMISSION AND THE NUCLEAR LOVING DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
SUGGEST TO THE EPA THAT THEY DO THIS??? After all, they were running
the show at the time. A Congressional investigation needs to be launched
to find out.

Hirsch said we do know from a monitor in Bakersfield, before it broke in mid-march, that radioactive air quality was spiking.

Sunday, 26 January 2014

In a response to the lack of interest and effort on behalf of the
Alaskan government to test radiation of the Alaskan fishing industry, A group
of concerned citizens (particularly those in the fishing industry), are banding
together to set-up a Private Collaboration to supply the Population with much
needed information about the safety of seafood.

The speculation is that the Government and Fishing Higher Order, are scared
that releasing results will cripple the Multi-Billion dollar industry, against Public
Health and Safety.

So I am helping.

These will be itemised for transparency both here on their web site.

HERE'S HOW TO HELP IF YOU ARE INTERESTED

1. Here is their first Questionnaire of which direction they
should be heading. (they are 90% ready to go)

2. To the top left, at the donate button any Donations will go
directly to helping them set up the Network, Purchase Testing equipment and
sending samples to laboratories and running costs. This is entirely Voluntary
contributions only, and is held in trust until it is required.

This option will stay open until they open their own services, and funds will be transfered directly to their committee.

Saturday, 25 January 2014

SpaceX, Tesla Motors, and Solar City had absolutely nothing to do with this production. It is purely a work for educational purposes by the Natural Disaster Protection Council. If you have any criticisms, levy them here.

Alaska Marine Science Symposium Jan. 20-24, 2014: 2011 Fukushima Fall Out: Aerial Deposition On To Sea Ice Scenario And Wildlife Health Implications To Ice-Associated Seals (Dr. Doug Dasher, John Kelley, Gay Sheffield, Raphaela Stimmelmayr) — Within five days of the accident atmospheric air masses carrying Fukushima radiation were transiting into the northern Bering and Chukchi seas. During summer 2011 it became evident to coastal communities and wildlife management agencies that there was a novel disease outbreak occurring in several species of Arctic ice-associated seals. Gross symptoms associated with the disease included lethargy, no new hair growth, and skin lesions, with the majority of the outbreak reports occurring between the Nome and Barrow region. NOAA and USFWS declared an Alaska Northern Pinnipeds Usual Mortality Event (UME) in late winter of 2011. The ongoing Alaska 2011 Northern Pinnipeds UME investigation continues to explore a mix of potential etiologies (infectious, endocrine, toxins, nutritious etc.), including radioactivity. Currently, the underlying etiology remains undetermined. We present results on gamma analysis (cesium 134 and 137) of muscle tissue from control and diseased seals, and discuss wildlife health implications from different possible routes of exposure to Fukushima fallout to ice seals. Since the Fukushima fallout period occurred during the annual sea ice cover period from Nome to Barrow, a sea ice based fallout scenario in addition to a marine food web based one is of particular relevance for the Fukushima accident. Under a proposed sea ice fallout deposition scenario, radionuclides would have been settled onto sea ice. Sea ice and snow would have acted as a temporary refuge for deposited radionuclides; thus radionuclides would have only become available for migration during the melting season and would not have entered the regional food web in any appreciable manner until breakup (pulsed release). The cumulative on-ice exposure for ice seals would have occurred through external, inhalation, and non-equilibrium dietary pathways during the ice-based seasonal spring haulout period for molting/pupping/breeding activities. Additionally, ice seals would have been under dietary/metabolic constraints and experiencing hormonal changes associated with reproduction and molting.

**Two of the four authors will be appearing on an Alaska radio program this Tuesday January 28 to discuss radiation from Fukushima:

Radiation from Fukushima, APRN (Alaska Public Radio Network), Jan. 24, 2014: Guests will be Professor Doug Dasher, Environmental Oceanographer, University of Alaska Fairbanks School of Fisheries and Ocean Science — Dr. John Kelley, Professor Emeritus, University of Alaska Fairbanks, former Director, Naval Arctic Research Laboratory — Post your comment before, during or after the live broadcast (comments may be read on air). LIVE Broadcast: Tuesday, January 28, 2014 at 10:00 a.m

Friday, 24 January 2014

Friday, January 24, 2014

Fukushima WAS a Nuclear Explosion, Here Is The Proof

The only way that the tens of tons of uranium and plutonium shown by US EPA air
samples could occur was if the explosion came from within the reactor vessel,
and/or spent fuel pool. So clearly the explosion was a nuclear type of
explosion from within. Nuclear promoters have long stated that nuclear plants
can't blow up in a nuclear explosion. We know this to be a lie. In fact
Chicago's own Argonne National Lab has video from back in the day when it was
"cool" to perform open air tests to blow up reactors to prove the nuclear chain
reaction can blow up the reactors. The special type of Nuclear Explosion is
called a "prompt moderated criticality".

A blast from a "hydrogen explosion" would come from a wide area where hydrogen
would be, Hydrogen is the lightest element, so it would float up and fill the
reactor building from the top down. If it truly was a hydrogen explosion, and
it wasn't, then the blast would come from the top down. The fuels would be
compressed into their deep containments, not launched thousands of feet into the
air as did occur.

I am going to stop calling these things reactor vessels, and instead call them
"Radiation Canons"

Here is the Argonne National Lab proof of concept

Borax - Safety experiment on a boiling water reactor - Safety experiment on a
boiling water reactor conducted by the Argonne National Lab

Even Arnie Gundersen chimed in to clarify the nature of the Prompt Criticality

This Prompt criticality doubles in power every
millionth of a second and causes incredibly rapid power increase that is the
destructive nature of a bomb. The second type of prompt criticality is
called a prompt MODERATED criticality, which is what I believed happened at
Fukushima.

Here is his whole email on the subject

Now we do know that tens of tons (at least) were launched into the air and
effectively aerosolized by the Radiation Canon (aka reactor vessel). Simply
using the density of the uranium and plutonium in the air as presented by EPA
air sampling tests that are data mined to reveal their dirty little
secrets. All that data and the simple calculations to calculate mass using
known density and area/volume of dispersion are HERE-

Read the link above, its important. It is the smoking gun. Here is a excerpt
table from the calcs in the link above, from EPA data

One thing to note, the nuclear promoters know that plutonium is a dirty word,
and many laymen knowhow dangerous plutonium is. In the table above, EPA states
ND supposedly for "None Detected" but in reality, that is a lie as the real
story was "not tested". 3 facts: in reactors, as uranium burns, it turns into
some percentage of plutonium. Also any "spent fuel" will therefore also
contain plutonium. And finally in Reactor, aka Radiation Canon 3, they were
using MOX fuel which is a uranium with highly concentrated Plutonium.

The nuclear promoters try to cover up their dirty
little secrets, to protect "their precious".

Bottom line....if there is uranium in the air, there is plutonium in the air.

Below you find 3 separate sources proving the Plutonium detected in USA and even
as far as Lithuania.

Wouldn't it be better to remove the Radiation Cannons from your Backyard?
Remove them all from the HOME PLANET.

Now, why do you think that they are claiming nothing
happened at Fukushima, and nothing harmful came out? They cannot afford to
let you know the horrible truth of what happened.

Toxicity of both Uranium and Plutonium are functions of their radioactivity AND
even more importantly, they are highly toxic heavy metals. Their One-Two
punch is a killer.

A 1996 testing of 144 Beagles given inhaled Plutonium killed 141 of the dogs
within 1.5 to 5.4 years. Bone tumours killed 93, Lung tumours killed 46, and
liver tumours killed 2 (although liver tumours were found in 20 dogs, just that
the Bone and Lung killed quicker).

TEPCO is pretty much confirming that it is dumping contamination into the pacific from what once nuclear reactor cores sinking into the ground below their plant. That material entering the Pacific is not a "dilution strategy" it is a thorough contamination strategy. Some daughter isotopes: cesium, iodine, strontium, "heavy hydrogen", etc... are biologically active. Some are "concentrated up the food chain" and affect top predators like ourselves more than vegetarians, and vegetarians more than the vegetables. But even tiny amounts of radioactive substances and radioactive poisons cause illness, cancer and death. And the statistics can hide the effects, but this is demonstrated science and even has it's own term "stochastic disease." Potassium iodide might help with the uptake of radioactive cesium and iodine but there are a whole host of radioactive substances coming "downwind" and downstream of fukushima that are harder to avoid. Arnie Gunderson recently noted during an interview on "Coast To Coast" at WFLA:

"Gundersen concurred on the direness of the Fukushima situation-- in contrast to Chernobyl and Three Mile Island, the "spigot" isn't turned off yet, and radiation continues to leak into the Pacific Ocean. Fish are picking up extraordinarily high levels of radioactive materials, and Gundersen said he would not eat fish that comes from the West Coast. In Japan, "the epidemiological data that will develop over the next 30 years [will show that] somewhere between 100,000 and 1 million new cancers will develop as a result of this," but the nuclear industry can hide behind the fact that a high percentage of people get cancer anyway, he pointed out. Gunderson stressed the importance of stopping the groundwater contamination, and suggested building a trench of zeolite to absorb the radiation surrounding the plant."

So far there is little effort that Japan is even taking this seriously. It may be that much of the material was scattered during the explosions and fires that occurred at the beginning of this disaster and that there is not that much left to contain. Who knows? But they could at least be doing something here.

Published time: January 23, 2014 19:17

Health officials in the coastal Canadian province of British Columbia are cautioning residents not to try and qualm fears of radioactive contamination by ingesting mass quantities of potassium iodide.

Journalist Dan Fumano of BC’s The Province newspaper wrote this week that potassium iodide pills have been flying off the shelves of area drug stores after reports published on the internet advised people that illnesses brought on by nuclear radiation can be remedied by taking regular doses of the inorganic compound.

The British Columbians buying those pills, Fumano wrote, are largely fearful that nuclear waste leaked into the Pacific Ocean three years ago by the destruction of the Fukushima power plant across the pond in Japan is washing up on their shores.

But while potassium iodide does indeed possess its fair share of positive qualities, experts say ingesting those pills is unnecessary and could cause lead to potentially dangerous overdoses.

Fumano wrote that potassium iodide sales in BC surged immediately after the Fukushima disaster, and have again in recent months started to climb. At least one pharmacist he spoke with said she’s been sending people out of the door of her drug store when they request the quasi-cure-all pills.

The US government and the Environmental Protection Agency, responsible for protecting human health and the environment, are not doing enough to systematically monitor air, food and ocean waters for radiation levels after the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant disaster in March 2011, California coast community say. Additionally no US government agency monitors radiation levels in ocean water.

John Bertucci, filmmaker and resident of the California’s northern coast, says that he has to carry Geiger counter wherever he goes to measure radiation levels in the air, water and food. He believes that the US government or local authorities are not monitoring radiation levels and there is no official data on the level of the radiation in California.

"Japan is thousands of miles from the California coast but there are indicators that the radiation is reaching California," said Bertucci, who also founded Fukushima Response, a social network for people living in northern California to share data on radiation in their neighborhood.

Fukushima Response members say that they are not convinced that the Environmental Protection Agency, a US governmental agency responsible for protecting human health and the environment, is doing enough to monitor radiation levels.